Open strategy: what is the impact of national culture?

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to argue that national cultural context variables influence open strategy formation processes. This study suggests that country-specific differences may influence open strategy, a form of strategic decision-making and present propositions linking national culture dimensions, national trust orientation and open strategy. Design/methodology/approach The conceptual framework links the literature on Hofstede’s cultural dimensions to the open strategy paradigm. This paper adopts a contingency approach linking national culture to open strategy. Findings The theoretical arguments demonstrate that uncertainty avoidance, time orientation, power distance, individualism versus collectivism and national trust culture all have a moderating influence on the antecedents and outcomes of open strategy. The findings extend the external validity of the open strategy paradigm and show that a culture-bound explanation of open strategy may be useful to the understanding of open strategy. Practical implications The findings highlight the challenges and opportunities that managers face when they adopt open strategy processes in multinational settings and across different cultures. Managers need to be aware that national cultural variables affect how employees behave and how they are likely to act when faced with opportunities for inclusion, shared decision-making and transparency. The findings suggest that training employees ahead of time on the cultural effects of their behavior may aid the successful adoption of open strategy in different cultures. Originality/value This manuscript to our knowledge, maybe one of the first to make a direct link between openness and national cultural values. In the process, the conceptual framework extends research on the role of context on openness, as well as research at the nexus of cross-cultural issues and strategic decision-making.

Open strategizing and accelerated internationalization process in different contexts

“…For instance, although both companies presented open practices that led to their fast internationalization, we perceived that the Brazilian company had a higher degree of openness in terms of the inclusion and transparency than the English company. We also observed greater organizational attitudes toward inclusiveness and transparency and frequent willingness from internal and external stakeholders towards participation both daily and when called upon (Adobor, 2021;Hautz et al, 2017). Specifically, we define BRZ as more open because, in comparison to the ENG, the company included internal and external people at higher levels of strategic decisions.…”

“…The cultural distance between countries and regions as well as the role of culture in the strategic decision-making process have been noted by international business (Konara and Mohr, 2019) and international management disciplines (Adobor, 2021;Hautz et al, 2017;Park and Paiva, 2018).…”

“…National cultural context is also important to build a better understanding of Open Strategizing because it may affect the approach companies have toward inclusiveness and transparency as well as how participants react to openness (Adobor, 2021). Based on Hofstede et al (2010), Adobor (2021) suggests that, in collectivist cultures, with a low power distance, a low uncertainty avoidance and with a tendency to have a long-term orientation, people are more willing to participate in openness and have more transparent managers. On the contrary, people tend to be more passive and unwilling to participate and managers are more restrictive in the way they open the strategy in individualist cultures with high uncertainty avoidance cultures and high-power distance.…”

“…Similarly, both companies were open in their practices as indicated by their democratic decision-making, joint analysis and great collaboration among people involved, and also in terms of strategic transparency, as they revealed to disseminate their strategic issues and call for participation using the same tools such as community platforms (Slack, Notion, Basecamp), PowerPoint presentations, e-mails, informal meetings and social media (Blogging, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and Instagram). Accordingly, the openness to ideas that came from internal employees and external stakeholders, such as customers, investors and consultants, has been identified in the Brazilian and in the English company which is a sign that both companies are receptive to new ways of strategizing rather than preferring the traditional ways (Adobor, 2021).…”

“…This high degree of openness, especially to internal members, can be explained using Hofstede et al (2010) dimensions. Brazil, being considered a collectivist culture, has stronger interactions among people due to their similar values, stronger ties and common language which facilitates the inclusion of people who have a higher willingness to participate (Adobor, 2021).…”